Literature DB >> 17054284

Laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis.

F Keus1, J A F de Jong, H G Gooszen, C J H M van Laarhoven.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cholecystectomy is one of the most frequently performed operations. Open cholecystectomy has been the gold standard for over 100 years. Small-incision cholecystectomy is a less frequently used alternative. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was introduced in the 1980s.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the beneficial and harmful effects of laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched TheCochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (6 April 2004), The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2004), EMBASE (1980 to January 2004), Web of Science (1988 to January 2004), and CINAHL (1982 to January 2004) for randomised trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: All published and unpublished randomised trials in patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis comparing any kind of laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus small-incision or other kind of minimal incision open cholecystectomy. No language limitations were applied. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently performed selection of trials and data extraction. The methodological quality of the generation of the allocation sequence, allocation concealment, blinding, and follow-up was evaluated to assess bias risk. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat principle. Authors were requested additional information in case of missing data. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed if appropriate. MAIN
RESULTS: Thirteen trials randomised 2337 patients. Methodological quality was relatively high considering the four quality criteria. Total complications of laparoscopic and small-incision cholecystectomy are high: 26.6% versus 22.9%. Total complications (risk difference, random-effects -0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.07 to 0.05), hospital stay (weighted mean difference (WMD), random-effects -0.72 days, 95% CI -1.48 to 0.04), and convalescence were not significantly different. High-quality trials show a quicker operative time for small-incision cholecystectomy (WMD, high-quality trials 'blinding', random-effects 16.4 minutes, 95% CI 8.9 to 23.8) while low-quality trials show no significant difference. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic and small-incision cholecystectomy seem to be equivalent. No differences could be observed in mortality, complications, and postoperative recovery. Small-incision cholecystectomy has a significantly shorter operative time. Complications in elective cholecystectomy are prevalent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17054284      PMCID: PMC8923053          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006229

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  152 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  A Johnson
Journal:  Br J Theatre Nurs       Date:  1999-03

2.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  [Changes in lung function after cholecystectomy--open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy].

Authors:  H Eickhoff; A Milheiro; L C Manso; F Castro-Sousa
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl Kongressbd       Date:  1997

4.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials.

Authors:  R DerSimonian; N Laird
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1986-09

5.  Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a national survey of 4,292 hospitals and an analysis of 77,604 cases.

Authors:  D J Deziel; K W Millikan; S G Economou; A Doolas; S T Ko; M C Airan
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 2.565

6.  Operative stress response is reduced after laparoscopic compared to open cholecystectomy: the relationship with postoperative pain and ileus.

Authors:  I Le Blanc-Louvry; A Coquerel; E Koning; C Maillot; P Ducrotté
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.199

7.  Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  D P McKellar; R M Johnson; J A Dutro; J Mellinger; W A Bernie; J B Peoples
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy produces less postoperative restriction of pulmonary function than open cholecystectomy.

Authors:  M D Williams; S M Sulentich; P C Murr
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1993 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Interleukin 6 (IL-6) levels in the monitoring of surgical trauma. A comparison of serum IL-6 concentrations in patients treated by cholecystectomy via laparotomy or laparoscopy.

Authors:  M Maruszynski; Z Pojda
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  [Cholecystectomy through minimal incision (author's transl)].

Authors:  F Dubois; B Berthelot
Journal:  Nouv Presse Med       Date:  1982-04-03
View more
  23 in total

1.  Outcome of laparoscopic cholecystectomy conversion: is the surgeon's selection needed?

Authors:  Sandra C Donkervoort; Lea M Dijksman; Lincey C F de Nes; Pieter G Versluis; Joris Derksen; Michael F Gerhards
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis should be performed by a laparoscopic surgeon.

Authors:  Kirsten Kortram; Jan Siert Kayitsinga Reinders; Bert van Ramshorst; Marinus J Wiezer; Peter M N Y H Go; Djamila Boerma
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-02-21       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Gallstones.

Authors:  Grant Sanders; Andrew N Kingsnorth
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-08-11

Review 4.  Targets for current pharmacologic therapy in cholesterol gallstone disease.

Authors:  Agostino Di Ciaula; David Q H Wang; Helen H Wang; Leonilde Bonfrate; Piero Portincasa
Journal:  Gastroenterol Clin North Am       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.806

Review 5.  Cholecystectomy and risk of metabolic syndrome.

Authors:  Agostino Di Ciaula; Gabriella Garruti; David Q-H Wang; Piero Portincasa
Journal:  Eur J Intern Med       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 4.487

6.  Small-incision cholecystectomy (through a cylinder retractor) under local anaesthesia and sedation: a prospective observational study of five hundred consecutive cases.

Authors:  Enrique J Grau-Talens; José Jacob Motos-Micó; Rafael Giraldo-Rubio; José M Aparicio-Gallego; José F Salgado; Carlos D Ibáñez; Pablo G Mangione-Castro; Martina Arribas-Jurado; Carlos Jordán-Chaves; Javier Arias-Díaz
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2018-09-15       Impact factor: 3.445

7.  Intraperitoneal wound in abdominal surgery.

Authors:  Arman Adam Kahokehr
Journal:  World J Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-02-04

8.  How often do surgeons obtain the critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

Authors:  Dimitrios Stefanidis; Nikita Chintalapudi; Brittany Anderson-Montoya; Bindhu Oommen; Daniel Tobben; Manuel Pimentel
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Cost-minimization analysis in a blind randomized trial on small-incision versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a societal perspective: sick leave outweighs efforts in hospital savings.

Authors:  Frederik Keus; Trudy de Jonge; Hein G Gooszen; Erik Buskens; Cornelis J H M van Laarhoven
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-09-04       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Assessing factors influencing return back to work after cholecystectomy: a qualitative research.

Authors:  Frederik Keus; Jolanda de Vries; Hein G Gooszen; Cornelis J H M van Laarhoven
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-01-27       Impact factor: 3.067

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.